2020 Polestar 2

[Anderss]

8 hours ago, Jtsjv said:

they 'hollowed' out the area for the rear passengers feet and placed the battery in the centre transmission tunnel instead. 

so that the rear passengers (left and right) will find the floor not as shallow and they can rest their legs more vertically/comfortably. This of course comes at a sacrifice for the middle rear passenger.

The worst.

[Watwheels]

On 1/10/2022 at 9:50 AM, Boringchap said:

I saw a Polestar yesterday and thought it was a Tesla haha.

 

The car is very tall for sedan. If you compare it to the civic in front of it the P2 looks like an SUV with a boot.

[Jtsjv]

2 hours ago, Anderss said:

The worst.

Probably so if u need to sit 5 adults in the car often.

for those who sit 3 or 4 adults usually will prefer this arrangement, especially for longer drives.

different trade offs, and for different needs.

Edited April 13, 2022 by Jtsjv

[Jtsjv]

2 hours ago, Anderss said:

The worst.

 

Edited April 13, 2022 by Jtsjv

[Jtsjv]

<removing dual reply to the same post>

[13177]

2 hours ago, Watwheels said:

The car is very tall for sedan. If you compare it to the civic in front of it the P2 looks like an SUV with a boot.

This car looks like CUV than sedan.

[Acegab]

Don't think this car the design will age well..

[mersaylee]

1 hour ago, Acegab said:

Don't think this car the design will age well..

Agreed personally but T3 lagi worse...dated at birth 😁

[Acegab]

3 minutes ago, mersaylee said:

Agreed personally but T3 lagi worse...dated at birth 😁

Just wait for Tesla roadster then

[BabyBlade]

Those who are looking at the Polestar 2. Polestar clearing their management units/test cars.

Long Range Single Motor: https://www.sgcarmart.com/used_cars/info.php?ID=1087922&DL=4181 

Long Range Dual Motor: https://www.sgcarmart.com/used_cars/info.php?ID=1087936&DL=4181 

[Jtsjv]

13 hours ago, 13177 said:

This car looks like CUV than sedan.

It is slightly raised. But i think it looks more like a Volvo sedan than a Volvo CUV.

 

[Jtsjv]

Just now, Jtsjv said:

It is slightly raised. But i think it looks more like a Volvo sedan than a Volvo CUV.

 

2 more pics for reference

[Ganwb79]

Since today was a holiday and I had free time and I was in the area I dropped into the Polestar showroom for a look. 3 deal breakers for me just sitting in the driver's seat.

1. The centre air con vents are weird. Probably because the tablet was blocking, the vents don't blow air out towards the driver. Why not just put them elsewhere if so? Major design fail. I set the fan speed to max and hardly felt any air flow at all. Air con is important for a car and I didn't feel like the air con on this car can cut it. It will get worse under the hot sun with the full glass roof. Major deal breaker.

2. The centre console is huge, for no good reason. There are not a lot of buttons, nor a lot of storage, so why does it need to be so wide? I felt constrained by it, couldn't sit with my legs open wide enough. 

3. The driver footwell is sloping downwards. Why? I couldn't adjust the seat to where I am not sitting in an awkward angle while working the pedals. Also, space between the brake and throttle pedals is too close. Yeah yeah, 1-pedal driving etc. But in times of need I can't be messing about and look for the brake pedal.

The back seat area is small-ish but because of the glass roof it does not feel very constrained, so all good.

Crossed the road to Volvo and the XC40 full electric. I feel that space wise it is less constrained for the driver. And the centre air con vents work. People considering the P2 should also look at the XC40, I find it better. 

[alphapunk2]

4 hours ago, Ganwb79 said:

Since today was a holiday and I had free time and I was in the area I dropped into the Polestar showroom for a look. 3 deal breakers for me just sitting in the driver's seat.

1. The centre air con vents are weird. Probably because the tablet was blocking, the vents don't blow air out towards the driver. Why not just put them elsewhere if so? Major design fail. I set the fan speed to max and hardly felt any air flow at all. Air con is important for a car and I didn't feel like the air con on this car can cut it. It will get worse under the hot sun with the full glass roof. Major deal breaker.

2. The centre console is huge, for no good reason. There are not a lot of buttons, nor a lot of storage, so why does it need to be so wide? I felt constrained by it, couldn't sit with my legs open wide enough. 

3. The driver footwell is sloping downwards. Why? I couldn't adjust the seat to where I am not sitting in an awkward angle while working the pedals. Also, space between the brake and throttle pedals is too close. Yeah yeah, 1-pedal driving etc. But in times of need I can't be messing about and look for the brake pedal.

The back seat area is small-ish but because of the glass roof it does not feel very constrained, so all good.

Crossed the road to Volvo and the XC40 full electric. I feel that space wise it is less constrained for the driver. And the centre air con vents work. People considering the P2 should also look at the XC40, I find it better. 

xc40 full electric asking price is too high.... it was $260,000+ when i went there...

[Acegab]

Xc40 price of a M3P cute...

[Jtsjv]

9 hours ago, Ganwb79 said:

Since today was a holiday and I had free time and I was in the area I dropped into the Polestar showroom for a look. 3 deal breakers for me just sitting in the driver's seat.

1. The centre air con vents are weird. Probably because the tablet was blocking, the vents don't blow air out towards the driver. Why not just put them elsewhere if so? Major design fail. I set the fan speed to max and hardly felt any air flow at all. Air con is important for a car and I didn't feel like the air con on this car can cut it. It will get worse under the hot sun with the full glass roof. Major deal breaker.

2. The centre console is huge, for no good reason. There are not a lot of buttons, nor a lot of storage, so why does it need to be so wide? I felt constrained by it, couldn't sit with my legs open wide enough. 

3. The driver footwell is sloping downwards. Why? I couldn't adjust the seat to where I am not sitting in an awkward angle while working the pedals. Also, space between the brake and throttle pedals is too close. Yeah yeah, 1-pedal driving etc. But in times of need I can't be messing about and look for the brake pedal.

The back seat area is small-ish but because of the glass roof it does not feel very constrained, so all good.

Crossed the road to Volvo and the XC40 full electric. I feel that space wise it is less constrained for the driver. And the centre air con vents work. People considering the P2 should also look at the XC40, I find it better. 

good candid review. it really depends on what the buyer is looking out for.

The PS2, XC40 and in time to come the C40 - all based on Volvo's compact modular architecture.

They will appeal to drivers with different needs. Quick summary without going into too much details (given that i've driven the PS2 for over 9000km - about 3700km overseas in winter and the rest in Singapore, more than 100km in the XC40 Recharge Twin in Singapore, and about 70km in the C40 Recharge Twin overseas):

- PS2 will appeal to those who want lower seating, better handling and bigger screen with (subjectively) better android automotive interface. Thanks to lower height and sedan shape, aerodynamics are better which means longer range. Rear headroom, general space in the cabin and practicality will be a challenge. Thankfully the 'boot opening' is hatchback style, while allows swallowing of large luggages more easily compared to sedans. The ride is also firmer (stick to the smaller 19" rims if comfort is essential). PS2 gives the option of a less aggressive regenerative braking for new users to get used to, in addition to just 'on' and 'off'.

- Volvo XC40 will be for those who need the space or prefer to sit higher up. The ride is more cushiony, but "bouncy" for some. Downsides are the relative handling (compared to the PS2), but still pretty good for its height and weight. Higher ride and more squarish shape means more drag and correspondingly lesser range compared to PS2 for the same power and battery capacity. I personally find the android automotive on the new Volvos a little less 'straight forward' to use compared to PS2, and the screen is rather small. Volvo doesn't give the option of a 'less aggressive' regenerative braking - it's either on or off.

- Volvo C40 will be somewhere in between the PS2 and the XC40. Most of the interior cabin space and practicality seen in the XC40 is available in the C40, less rear passenger headroom and boot height. The car is also slightly lower (suspension) than the XC40 - which means better handling than XC40, while still having more comfortable ride than the PS2. Coupe style design means its aerodynamics is improved over XC40, and it's range will be closer to the PS2.

XC40 has a VES rating of A2 (compared to A1 for PS2), which means price will be higher for the same dual motor variant. In Singapore, PS2 offers the more cost-effective options of single motor with both long range and standard range, which the XC40 doesn't have (it should be coming soon though). Correspondingly, road tax for the single motor will be a lot lower than the dual motors - higher half of $1k (which is significantly cheaper than the Dual motors, and even Tesla M3's single motor due to the lower power output).

Of course, PS2 (only dual motor version) will have a top speed beyond Volvo's recently implemented top speed of 180kph across its line up.

Lastly, PS2 design was supposed to be Volvo's sedan version of the XC40 before it was 'given' to Polestar when the brand was set up by Volvo. It was launched as Concept 40.2 by Volvo in 2016 (XC40 was Concept 40.1). Expectedly, XC40 will be more spacious than the its sedan sibling, just like XC60 is to S60, and XC90 is to S90. The wagons (V60 cross country and V90 cross country) are the in-between, which i guess is filled up by the C40 for the 40 series.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 15, 2022 by Jtsjv

[Lethalstrike]

11 hours ago, alphapunk2 said:

xc40 full electric asking price is too high.... it was $260,000+ when i went there...

They only had the 408hp dual motor XC40 variant, which explains the pricing. Honestly, if compared to MB EQA250 and Lexus UX 300e which are direct competitors in the same small SUV segment and priced even higher with half the XC40's power, it's honestly still not too bad.

Bad thing is low OMV which always seems to the case with Wearnes Volvo. That means higher depreciation. 

Also, 408hp EV you will kanna the highest banding for road tax. $4k+ per year including AFC. If really want the XC40 BEV, wait for single motor variant better lah. 

 

 

[Lethalstrike]

7 hours ago, Jtsjv said:

good candid review. it really depends on what the buyer is looking out for.

The PS2, XC40 and in time to come the C40 - all based on Volvo's compact modular architecture.

They will appeal to drivers with different needs. Quick summary without going into too much details (given that i've driven the PS2 for over 9000km - about 3700km overseas in winter and the rest in Singapore, more than 100km in the XC40 Recharge Twin in Singapore, and about 70km in the C40 Recharge Twin overseas):

- PS2 will appeal to those who want lower seating, better handling and bigger screen with (subjectively) better android automotive interface. Thanks to lower height and sedan shape, aerodynamics are better which means longer range. Rear headroom, general space in the cabin and practicality will be a challenge. Thankfully the 'boot opening' is hatchback style, while allows swallowing of large luggages more easily compared to sedans. The ride is also firmer (stick to the smaller 19" rims if comfort is essential). PS2 gives the option of a less aggressive regenerative braking for new users to get used to, in addition to just 'on' and 'off'.

- Volvo XC40 will be for those who need the space or prefer to sit higher up. The ride is more cushiony, but "bouncy" for some. Downsides are the relative handling (compared to the PS2), but still pretty good for its height and weight. Higher ride and more squarish shape means more drag and correspondingly lesser range compared to PS2 for the same power and battery capacity. I personally find the android automotive on the new Volvos a little less 'straight forward' to use compared to PS2, and the screen is rather small. Volvo doesn't give the option of a 'less aggressive' regenerative braking - it's either on or off.

- Volvo C40 will be somewhere in between the PS2 and the XC40. Most of the interior cabin space and practicality seen in the XC40 is available in the C40, less rear passenger headroom and boot height. The car is also slightly lower (suspension) than the XC40 - which means better handling than XC40, while still having more comfortable ride than the PS2. Coupe style design means its aerodynamics is improved over XC40, and it's range will be closer to the PS2.

XC40 has a VES rating of A2 (compared to A1 for PS2), which means price will be higher for the same dual motor variant. In Singapore, PS2 offers the more cost-effective options of single motor with both long range and standard range, which the XC40 doesn't have (it should be coming soon though). Correspondingly, road tax for the single motor will be a lot lower than the dual motors - higher half of $1k (which is significantly cheaper than the Dual motors, and even Tesla M3's single motor due to the lower power output).

Of course, PS2 (only dual motor version) will have a top speed beyond Volvo's recently implemented top speed of 180kph across its line up.

Lastly, PS2 design was supposed to be Volvo's sedan version of the XC40 before it was 'given' to Polestar when the brand was set up by Volvo. It was launched as Concept 40.2 by Volvo in 2016 (XC40 was Concept 40.1). Expectedly, XC40 will be more spacious than the its sedan sibling, just like XC60 is to S60, and XC90 is to S90. The wagons (V60 cross country and V90 cross country) are the in-between, which i guess is filled up by the C40 for the 40 series.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for sharing. I think the C40 will be worse off than the XC40 for practicality, its sloping roof line at the back will probably equates to reduced head-room and possibly less boot volume, particularly for taller and bulkier items. People will only buy the C40 for its style and design.